Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 7 Oct 1987

Vol. 117 No. 2

Adjournment Matter. - Frenchpark (Roscommon) National School.

First of all, I would like to thank you, a Chathaoirligh, for allowing me to bring forward this motion tonight. As of today and for the past three days this school is closed due to official strike because of the condition of the school. That strike will be renewed in future weeks. From next week there will be a parents' strike when the children will be withdrawn for at least one day per week. This will go on indefinitely until such time as this dispute is settled.

The school in Frenchpark was built in 1950. It was built of sub-standard and second-hand materials. It is now in an appalling state of dereliction. It consists of a main building, the one built in 1950, which has two classrooms and ancilliary facilities such as cloakroom and toilet space although they could hardly be described as such nowadays. On the school grounds there is one prefab building which is 20 years old and totally rotten. One classroom is accommodated in a local parochial hall which is situated about a half a mile from the main school building. There are 110 pupils on the roll.

Let me give the House a brief description of the building. I will not give the House my description of the building, instead I will read from reports of the county medical officer for County Roscommon. These reports were published in March 1984 and in April 1987. He said that the main school building is definitely unsuitable; that it is cold and damp; that it is intermittently rat infested; that it is overcrowded and has only partial toilet space; that the heating is effective in moderate weather and hopeless in cold weather and that the ventilation is very poor. If the windows are opened they may fail apart and therefore, they must remain closed. Regarding the prefabricated classroom along with most of the comments which had been applied to the main building were also applicable to the prefab.

He summed up his report on this prefabricated building by saying that it is falling to pieces. On the parochial hall housing one of the school's classrooms, the medical officer reports that the place is very poor and unsuitable and the heating is very poor. His final comment was that it is totally inadequate and unfit.

Let me elaborate a little further on this classroom in the hall as it is about half a mile away from the main school building. On each school day the school transport service drops 28 young children who are taught in this classroom at the main building and they must be taken on foot for a half mile under the supervision of their teacher to the hall along a very busy national primary road, the N5. This has to be done in all kinds of weather. The age range of these children is from six to eight years. I think the Minister of State will agree that this is totally unacceptable.

The campaign to provide better school facilities in Frenchpark goes back for almost seven years. For a number of years, in the early stages, there was a lengthy debate with a lot of prevarication by the Department as to whether the old school should be extended and repaired or whether a new school should be provided. That argument was finally settled late in 1984. Early in March 1985, after the Department had instructed him to do so, the manager applied formally for a new school and then the lengthy cumbersome planning process began. The sketch plans for the school were prepared by the manager's architect and sent to the Department on 24 January 1986. The Department approved the sketch plans on 21 March 1986. On 29 April the Minister's predecessor, Deputy Enda Kenny, the then Minister of State at the Department of Education, visited and inspected the school. He freely agreed that the buildings were disgraceful and he promised that he would push all the remaining stages ahead with all possible speed and this, I acknowledge in this House, he did exactly.

The discussion on the level of grant was quickly out of the way. The Minister sanctioned a grant of 92 per cent of total cost which an Opposition TD in the constituency described at that time as "one of the highest levels of grant ever sanctioned". Instruction was then issued from the Department of Education that the working drawings should be drawn up and this was done. They were submitted and sanctioned by the Department in record time. The bills of quantities were asked for by the Department and they were prepared and sanctioned at the end of 1986. They were also done in record time. Late in January 1987 the Minister of State released the project to tender. Tenders were submitted and the Department were in a position to appoint a contractor to build in April last. But, alas, that did not happen because the Minister would not sign the order.

In June of this year a deputation representing the management and parents met the Minister for Education, Deputy O'Rourke. She told the delegation that she could not sign the order to go to contract because the previous Government had not given her sufficient money to go ahead with the work. She apparently forgot that the previous Government had been out of office for four weeks before the budget for this year and that the educational budget was also brought in by the present Government. In charity one can only say that an excuse of that kind is contemptible or laughable. However, based on the photographic evidence that was presented to the Minister on that day she did agree that the school was in an appalling condition and she promised that it would get top priority as soon as finance was available. She stated also that if there was any finance left over from her school building budget for 1987 — which apparently will not now be the case — Frenchpark school would get the benefit of this. All the rumours that are now coming forth seem to suggest that there will be very little money, some might say none, for school buildings in 1987. This sends reverberations down the spines of people who are interested in this project in Frenchpark.

There is an absolute duty on the Minister to sanction this project now. She has described the building as appalling. She used those words to the delegation who met her last May. The Minister of State, Deputy Terry Leyden attended a public meeting in Frenchpark on 11 January last. He was then a member of the Fianna Fáil Frontbench and was obviously talking with the full authority of the Fianna Fáil Frontbench when, as reported in the Roscommon Herald of 16 January 1987, he described this school as an educational ghetto and said it was the worst building he had ever seen. He said it should be a top priority of the Government, of any Government, to provide the money for that project.

This building is a wretched, derelict, appalling, awful place. I appeal to the Minister to sanction the grant now. To anyone in power, with even the least sense of duty, this cries out for correction and we call on you, Minister to use your power to correct it.

Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh agus mo bhuíochas, chomh maith don Seanadóir Conchubhair as ucht an seans seo a thabhairt dom labhairt ar an scoil seo.

It is a cause of sadness to me and to my colleagues in Frenchpark national school and to teachers everywhere that we have one more time to draw attention to yet another hedge school. This does not even deserve the title of hedge school. The school in question is an eye sore on a public highway for any one driving past Frenchpark on the western side. On this problem, the parents, teachers, management, the parish priest and everybody else in the community is of the same mind. I am not going to go into the exact details because Senator Connor has outlined them clearly and very effectively in a way that cannot be matched.

The school has been inspected by the INTO, by the local community, by management authorities and by health authorities and all have the same view, that is that the school is not a suitable place in which either to learn or to teach. That is the precise position that must be attacked. The main building is structurally unsound. The question might need to be asked as to why it is structurally unsound considering that it has been in existence for only 40 years or less. This school is falling to pieces. The roof is leaking, the toilets are constantly flooding, windows are rotten and draughty and there is a totally inadequate heating system. It is not a place in which there could be created a proper ambience for the education of children. One might well ask what the children and the teachers in the school have done that prevents them having the same level of support and the kind of surroundings that are available in other schools.

The prefab in use at Frenchpark is 20 years old. I do not know if people understand the long-term difficulties associated with such buildings, whether in respect of having to use them for the purpose of education or for living in. Basically, they are too hot in the summer and too cold in the winter. Research has shown that among those using the older prefabs, there is a particularly high incidence of health problems such as heavy flu and chest problems. The prefab we are talking of has rotten floors and broken windows and there is a fear that the windows will fall out. A member of the teaching staff has told me that when a lorry passes by items fall off the shelves in the prefab. There was a terrible situation in a school in Donegal a year ago when a prefab was blown into the sea. The prefab at Frenchpark could be turned over, too, because it is so dangerously structured at present.

The INTO representative, Michael McGarry, who examined the school said that it is a disgrace to the educational service and should be replaced immediately. The fourth classroom is totally unsuitable because, as was outlined by Senator Connor, it is on the far side of a national highway. It is unacceptable that this level of risk and isolation should be imposed on the pupils. The sanitary conditions are appalling; ventilation is poor; heating is hopeless; rats have been found in the school and vermin is a constant problem. Luckily, the teachers have retained a sense of humour. One teacher said to me that the place is becoming too bad even for the rats and the mice to come into it now. It is unsuitable, cold, damp and vermin infested.

I will not go through the health inspector's report except to say that in 1985 the school was considered by the health inspectors to be totally and utterly unsuitable as a school. They said then that action should be taken without delay to deal with the problem. Neither will I go through what happened in 1985, 1986 and 1987 in terms of the school project being at the stage of being ready to go to tender. Senator Connor has outlined that.

I hope that the Minister does not stand up and tell us what has happened over the last four years. The people of Frenchpark have a right to know what is going to happen next because everybody knows precisely and ad nauseam what has happened so far. All we need to know now is what the next step is to be. The absolute insult and the final ignominy in this whole business was to hear the Minister for Education say this week that she was going to consult with the Department about the school. Somebody should tell the Minister that she is the Minister and that she can make a decision in these matters. She should do this immediately for the sake of education, of the service at this school and of the children who are trying to learn in those absolutely desperate conditions.

I agree with what has been said about the condition of the school. I visited this school during the summer and, like all others, I agree that the building is entirely unsatisfactory. Therefore I am anxious that we move as quickly as possible to have the school replaced. However, I have to correct Senator Connor in regard to the situation. He was rather political in his description of events. I want to set the record straight in that regard but this is not in any way to take away from the urgency of having progress made on this school, details of which I will talk about in a moment.

This school has been in a bad situation since the beginning of 1985 when a decision was taken that it should be replaced. On going through the various planning stages, I can find no evidence of any great degree of urgency in regards to a stage being reached where the planning and architectural drawings could be completed so that we could get on with the construction of this school. Furthermore, I find that a considerable amount of time was wasted during the period of the last Government in carrying out a number of feasibility studies and other exercises which if this school needed to be so replaced so urgently were not necessary. An aspect of the planning of this project which leaves me with little choice other than to be in the position I am now in. The position is that my predecessor approved the invitation of tenders for this school together with 26 other projects just a couple of weeks before he left office.

Senator Connor is incorrect in saying that allocations are based on budgetary decisions. They are not. Financial allocations are based on the Estimates. The Estimate for 1987 under which I am now operating is the Estimate of the previous Coalition Government. My difficulty is that my prececessor authorised 26 projects to go to tender in January of this year, knowing full well that he would not be in a position from the Estimate he had provided to proceed with the construction of those schools. That is precisely my difficulty. It has been my difficulty since I took this office. We want to proceed with Frenchpark but we are not in a position to do so because of the fact that our allocation in the 1987 Estimate only allows us to carry out works which were in progress. We are not in a position to start any of the 26 projects which went out to tender in January of this year.

If they go ahead now, will they be paid in January?

I want to clear up the point that the Department, the Minister and myself seem to be culprits in this situation. We are not. I want to make that point very clearly. We are operating completely under the Estimates which we inherited.

On a point of order——

There is no point of order. Let the Minister conclude.

Up to now it has not been possible to proceed with the contract because of that fact. I accept that this school is in an intolerable position.

It is only one of a number of schools in a similar situation which appalled me when I went to visit them throughout the summer. There is an urgent need to proceed with the construction of a new school but the situation I find myself in in the current year prevents me from making any progress for the remainder of this year.

There are only about seven weeks left.

The only commitment I can give at this stage is that this project will be looked at in the context of next year's Estimates——

Will you prioritise it?

——in addition to other serious problematic projects to be carried out throughout the country. In view of the situation that pertains in Frenchpark I have asked a senior official from my Department to enter into early negotiations with the school authorities to see what steps it may be possible to take to improve the situation, pending the construction of the new school. They are prepared to make a significant effort to improve the prefabricated building and, in fact, if possible to replace the prefabricated building without causing any delay in the overall project. We are prepared to carry out other short term interim measures in order to relieve the present conditions. I am interested in Senator Connor's comment on young children being left at the school and then having to walk half a mile. Perhaps he might tell me, with your permission a Chathaoirligh, why they are not being dropped off at the hall? Is there a reason they cannot be taken to the hall?

I am under instructions from the Cathaoirleach to be silent.

Obviously the Minister does not know the rules either but I will allow Senator Connor to answer the Minister.

I blame the transport system operated by the Minister's Department which is so structured that it would not allow those children to be dropped off at the parochial hall rather than at the school. That is the reason for that.

Certainly I will look at that situation to see if it would be possible to make an arrangement so that the children can be dropped off at the hall.

On a point of information, I would like to clarify two points. First, an insurance problem is the reason they have to be dropped off at the school. Second, you cannot have a class in isolation from the rest of the school. There will be times when they operate in joint activities and they have to communicate up and down through the school.

I accept that. I am attempting to improve a bad situation. I accept there are difficulties and that it is not at all satisfactory that the school should be split in the way it is. I am genuinely concerned about trying to improve the situation in the short term because, even if we started the school in the morning, it would not be built for 12 months. I am anxious to carry out whatever short term interim measures will improve this situation in Frenchpark and, as soon as the financial situation changes, Frenchpark will certainly be one of the first projects to proceed.

The Seanad adjourned at 8.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 8 October 1987.

Top
Share